Un Global Warming Tax On International Air Tix/Money Transfers

[Jingthing]

Heard there is a proposal for the UN to collect a global warming tax on both international air tickets and international money transfers. The money would go to the hardest hit poor countries dealing with the impact of global warming such as Bangladesh, but probably someday Thailand as well. I happen to believe global warming is real and that it is man made. I am assuming if you don't, you won't be OK with this tax. Another factor, is how much will the tax be, so for the sake of the poll just assume it isn't ruinously bad. My personal opinion, I am OK with the air fare tax but not OK with the money transfer tax.

Edited August 7, 2010 by Jingthing

[gotlost]

I did not know that the UN was my government and could tax me? They can stuff this idea and leave New york.

[Jingthing]

If you don't believe in global warming, please vote that way. Only vote OK or NOT OK if you DO believe in global warming (third choice). Thanks.

Edited August 7, 2010 by Jingthing

[Jingthing]

I did not know that the UN was my government and could tax me? They can stuff this idea and leave New york.

I share your concern about that but as I do believe in man made global warming and I do believe it is mostly poor countries suffering from the gluttony of the rich, I don't know how else there will any justice for those poor countries. Do you?

[gotlost]

I did not know that the UN was my government and could tax me? They can stuff this idea and leave New york.

I share your concern about that but as I do believe in man made global warming and I do believe it is mostly poor countries suffering from the gluttony of the rich, I don't know how else there will any justice for those poor countries. Do you?

No argument on the poor countries getting the shaft but to let an international organization that can hardly govern themselves say I must pay an international tax, NOWAY.

[Jingthing]

I did not know that the UN was my government and could tax me? They can stuff this idea and leave New york.

I share your concern about that but as I do believe in man made global warming and I do believe it is mostly poor countries suffering from the gluttony of the rich, I don't know how else there will any justice for those poor countries. Do you?

No argument on the poor countries getting the shaft but to let an international organization that can hardly govern themselves say I must pay an international tax, NOWAY.

Yes, I get that. But the spirit of it, that the rich countries are going to have to pay some kind of price for the damage they are doing, that seems very fair to me. Airfares seems reasonable to me, you are burning a lot of jet fuel. Money transfers could be for anything, that seems random and more unfair. Just transferring money doesn't pollute in itself. You could tax autos in rich countries, but have fun with the politics of people paying taxes to their country that is meant to leave their country.

Edited August 7, 2010 by Jingthing

[473geo]

Just don't get the money transfer tax..........why......what is the impact on global warming of a money transfer

There should also be a global warming tax on everyday motoring fuel.....fair is fair, why should somebody who say walks to work, or takes the train, be penalised for air travel, when a motorist gets away free!

Not saying there should be no tax on air travel, just a correct balance.

[gotlost]

I did not know that the UN was my government and could tax me? They can stuff this idea and leave New york.

I share your concern about that but as I do believe in man made global warming and I do believe it is mostly poor countries suffering from the gluttony of the rich, I don't know how else there will any justice for those poor countries. Do you?

No argument on the poor countries getting the shaft but to let an international organization that can hardly govern themselves say I must pay an international tax, NOWAY.

Yes, I get that. But the spirit of it, that the rich countries are going to have to pay some kind of price for the damage they are doing, that seems very fair to me. Airfares seems reasonable to me, you are burning a lot of jet fuel. Money transfers could be for anything, that seems random and more unfair. Just transferring money doesn't pollute in itself.

Then let these rich countries tax their own citizens according to their laws for this purpose NOT a dysfunctional organization that is Nobodies government.

[maxman71]

Let some left-wing country host and support the UN. If the UN leaves New York and the largess of US taxpayers, the only people in the US who will cry foul are Saab mechanics and a few ethnic delicatessen owners.

[Jingthing]

Oh sorry, it wasn't my intention for the focus to be on the U.N. part of it, but I can understand the objection.

[JustinCredible]

How can the UN impose taxes?

Who will collect them? Who will manage them?

This is a fantasy.......

Where did you hear this Jingthing? Can you lead us to some evidence to support such a statement?

Edited August 7, 2010 by JustinCredible

[eek]

One flame post deleted. Please discuss with civility. Thanks.

[Jingthing]

How can the UN impose taxes?

Who will collect them? Who will manage them?

This is a fantasy.......

Where did you hear this Jingthing? Can you lead us to some evidence to support such a statement?

Your wish is my command, sir.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100805/ap_on_sc/climate_change

I think this poll would be better if I just asked are you willing to pay more taxes to help out the countries on the front lines of global warming damage such as Bangladesh. Adding the UN to it makes people mad, understandably.

Edited August 7, 2010 by Jingthing

[zzaa09]

I did not know that the UN was my government and could tax me? They can stuff this idea and leave New york.

I'm perplexed as well:blink: I wasn't aware that the U.N. was a uniquely legislative and taxing body.

[zzaa09]

I share your concern about that but as I do believe in man made global warming and I do believe it is mostly poor countries suffering from the gluttony of the rich, I don't know how else there will any justice for those poor countries. Do you?

I don't believe that gluttony of the rich is purely limited to those poor countries that you speak of. The disparity between the rich few and the poorer majority is quite evident throughout your beloved civilised cultures, as well.

[ericthai]

Are you OK with paying global warming taxes on intl air fares?

Yes, as long as it is reasonable and not like 50% or more of the cost of a ticket.

International wire Transfer NO!!

Once complete can you please post the results, it will be interesting, right now it seems everyone is ok with the airfare, as long as it is comming from their own government and not the UN.

Good poll, just need the answers!!!

Edited August 8, 2010 by ericthai

[rgs2001uk]

How can the UN impose taxes?

Who will collect them? Who will manage them?

This is a fantasy.......

Where did you hear this Jingthing? Can you lead us to some evidence to support such a statement?

Sounds like more jobs for the boys, a few more snouts in the trough.

The UN would collect and manage them, but I imagine the administrative costs would be more than they actually collect.

How about getting UN staffers to start paying the parking tickets they pick up instead of ignoring them.

The UN is nothing but a talking shop, they couldnt agree on the colour of shit, time they became proactive instead of reactive.

As for Bangladesh, that country has had its begging bowl out for years, didnt George Harrison have a concert for them in 1970?

Time some of the worlds banana republics took responsibility for their own actions or inactions.

Much better to have a pile of UN stock for their corrupt leaders to plunder for their own political aims.

Jeez even the Americans have billions unaccounted for in Iraq.

[teatree]

A few years ago I mentioned that a carbon tax was coming in the wake of all this global warming nonsense and got called a kook, well here it is.

But it won't stop it this. This just sets the precedent. The road we are going down leads to carbon rationing where everything you buy will be tracked and recorded on your personal "carbon card" and if you go over your limit heavy fines will have to be paid. Of course we will all be at the mercy of the government who can decided exactly how austere the quotas will be, how much we can buy, how often we can travel, what temperature we can keep our houses etc etc etc. But, we can trust the government to be reasonable and have our interests at heart can't we?

As I have said before, global warming/climate change is about TAX and CONTROL.

[canuckamuck]

Exactly Tea Tree, the big incentive is to set up carbon trading as a additional type of currency so we can have even more ridiculous rich world banks.

Viva le resistance.

[zzaa09]

Bit of a paradox, yes? As it is well understood that commercial airline emissions contribute highly to the long-standing debate as to the Global Warming issues.....think about it. On any giving day, there are thousands of flights throughout the world.....continue to contradict in every which manner. A tax. This is akin to the foxes asking the chickens to pay a tax on their watchful eye.

[Jingthing]

These tax ideas are obviously a stopgap emergency measure idea. As it is clear there isn't the political will to make the super hard changes to stop the warming at the source, the focus now is shifting more on adaptation measures to deal with the existing and coming damage. To people who doubt global warming you might as well say you doubt gravity or death, there is really nothing to discuss with such irrational people.

One other point, to make the changes instantly to stop the problem at the source is probably IMPOSSIBLE. So the damage has begun; this isn't going away. For older folks, oh well, but for younger people this is your legacy. Sorry.

Edited August 9, 2010 by Jingthing

[bifftastic]

Seems the UN part of this discussion has upset many people, as has the word 'tax'. Somewhere along the line, something needs to be done to address the effects of climate change. The UN would not be able to impose a tax on anyone, but it is a forum where such measures can be discussed. These things need to be as global as possible in order to have an effect.

There is much talk of 'carbon neutrality' where a premium is paid to 'offset' carbon emissions. I'm still unclear as to how this actually works, I mean if you pay more money for your airline ticket the 'plane still has the same emissions as when you didn't. The only way to reduce the impact of air travel on the environment is to reduce these emissions, not pay more money.

As for a tax on money transfers....why?

It seems, in the current financial climate, there are moves to insulate and retreat from more globalised ways of thinking . So anything 'international' is seen as, somehow, damaging. The idea that money transfers, which are actually not real at all, just banks agreeing via computer that assets have been moved, has any impact on the environment is baffling.

[Jingthing]

The only reasoning I can think for the money transfers ideas are --

big biz uses them a lot, a way to glean money off corporate giants

if a biz wires money to purchase goods that will travel internationally, the goods will burn fuel being moved

I don't like it either, it seems too unfocused.

[bifftastic]

Yeah, very un-focused. If the goods travel then the tax on the travel would be imposed.

I understand the concept of 'polluter pays' but I think this smacks more of isolationist anti-trade policies which certain governments in certain parts of the world tend to run to when their economies are suffering, rather than a genuine attempt to correct any climate issues.

[Jingthing]

Yeah, very un-focused. If the goods travel then the tax on the travel would be imposed.

I understand the concept of 'polluter pays' but I think this smacks more of isolationist anti-trade policies which certain governments in certain parts of the world tend to run to when their economies are suffering, rather than a genuine attempt to correct any climate issues.

Here's hoping the money transfer tax gets the kabosh, but I think the air travel idea has legs.

[bifftastic]

Yeah, very un-focused. If the goods travel then the tax on the travel would be imposed.

I understand the concept of 'polluter pays' but I think this smacks more of isolationist anti-trade policies which certain governments in certain parts of the world tend to run to when their economies are suffering, rather than a genuine attempt to correct any climate issues.

Here's hoping the money transfer tax gets the kabosh, but I think the air travel idea has legs.

It does, however, if the idea is to reduce airline travel by making it more expensive, that has an impact on a) the airlines, with the lobbying power they have that could be impossible to implement. b ) the idea that those less able to pay should be penalised, is a tax on the less well off and, as usual, those who have caused the problem in the first place still get to fly around the world and pass on any increased costs to those of us who can no longer afford to do so.

If the tax is 'ring fenced' and spent on reducing emissions from 'planes then yes, it would have an effect, but ordinary folk would still pay twice, by not being able to travel so much and paying more when they did, and by paying more to businesses, via increased costs to end users, to fund the increase in business travel costs.

Edited August 9, 2010 by bifftastic

[Jingthing]

Nobody likes taxes but anyone who has studied the Age Of Oil we have lived through realizes this was a historical bubble, we have been pillaging the wealth of the ancient ages for a few short moments of historical gluttony. It isn't sustainable. The hope of course is new technology to replace fossil fuels but we ain't there yet. The goal now needs to be for the planet to survive as habitable until we do.

[bifftastic]

Nobody likes taxes but anyone who has studied the Age Of Oil we have lived through realizes this was a historical bubble, we have been pillaging the wealth of the ancient ages for a few short moments of historical gluttony. It isn't sustainable. The hope of course is new technology to replace fossil fuels but we ain't there yet. The goal now needs to be for the planet to survive as habitable until we do.

Yes, there's no question that the oil will run out and we need to drastically change our way of life.

Still not convinced that adding to the price of an airline ticket will do anything other than put the price up!

[Jingthing]

Nobody likes taxes but anyone who has studied the Age Of Oil we have lived through realizes this was a historical bubble, we have been pillaging the wealth of the ancient ages for a few short moments of historical gluttony. It isn't sustainable. The hope of course is new technology to replace fossil fuels but we ain't there yet. The goal now needs to be for the planet to survive as habitable until we do.

Yes, there's no question that the oil will run out and we need to drastically change our way of life.

Still not convinced that adding to the price of an airline ticket will do anything other than put the price up!

Frankly, I'm not either but don't really have any better ideas. Human nature is to wait for a total crisis and in this case, it may be too late for the planet if we wait too long.

[zzaa09]

Nobody likes taxes but anyone who has studied the Age Of Oil we have lived through realizes this was a historical bubble, we have been pillaging the wealth of the ancient ages for a few short moments of historical gluttony. It isn't sustainable. The hope of course is new technology to replace fossil fuels but we ain't there yet. The goal now needs to be for the planet to survive as habitable until we do.

Yes, there's no question that the oil will run out and we need to drastically change our way of life.

Still not convinced that adding to the price of an airline ticket will do anything other than put the price up!

Well, of course not. They'll continue to fly their routes, expand, use the same fuel, etc. Quite pathetic that we buy into such blatant and manipulated corporate rhetoric.